Why Google’s self-styled media hub is a joke

Google, Facebook and Twitter are all owned by Google, but they’re all operating under the same brand: self-serve.

And if you need to download or stream a song or video, Google will send you to the self-hosted YouTube or Facebook app.

(That’s where you can also find news stories, and if you want to share them on Twitter or Google+, you can do that too.)

This means that if you’re looking for a way to find news on your mobile device, Google or Facebook will be the only way.

And that’s the bad news.

For a few years, these two giants have been running an elaborate web of self-serving web services that work like this: The service you need is a Google Chrome or Firefox browser.

And you can go to YouTube and YouTube is a self-managed website, so you can find videos, news, photos and other media there.

Google+ is a website run by Google that lets you share links and images on Google+.

And if there’s an ad on the video you want, you can click on it, and it will send a banner ad to your phone.

And so on.

All these services are designed to make it easier to find information on the web.

Google and Facebook, however, do not own the sites, so they can’t control what people see, read or do with them.

The other bad news for Google is that most of its services are pretty basic.

And Google doesn’t have a huge number of paid ads.

(Ads can be a nice bonus for paying users, but Google isn’t making any money off of them.)

Google also doesn’t pay people to use its services.

This means that Google can charge more for videos, photos, and music that it doesn’t own, and the companies that run these services can charge higher rates for them.

This makes Google’s business model worse than it already is.

Google says that these companies have an obligation to the public to make the services available to everyone.

But Google says it’s not trying to get people to give up their privacy, it’s trying to make them more accessible and useful.

And it’s going to have to pay up to make these services better.

But it’s also going to get the same kind of criticism that Facebook and Apple got in recent years.

Google says that if these companies can’t improve their services, then they shouldn’t be allowed to keep them.

In practice, that means Google has to keep doing things like giving users a paid Google Plus account, and charging for the right to watch YouTube videos, and giving users access to Google+.

But these companies are free to continue to offer these services to anyone who wants them.

And what’s this all about?

It’s all about the media industry.

Facebook and YouTube are huge business, but these companies don’t actually own their websites.

Facebook owns the platform, but it’s only a platform for sharing and advertising.

YouTube, on the other hand, owns the website and the ads that run there.

And the sites run by Facebook and Google are part of the media ecosystem.

And by the way, this is where Google wants you to watch video.

So Google wants to keep the content that you share with Google+ on Google+, which is how Google wants your news to be seen.

And even though Google can’t own the website, it can control the way you get it.

The problem with these businesses is that they don’t have to keep their own website, which is what a company like Facebook does.

Instead, they make content available to anyone that wants it.

That means that you can watch YouTube and Facebook videos, for example, and YouTube will send the video to your computer or mobile device.

And this isn’t a bad thing, because YouTube is part of a large, vibrant, interconnected, public, free-for-all of content.

But the reality is that many of these services rely on ad-supported ads.

That is, Google pays to run ads on YouTube.

Facebook does the same thing for Facebook and the like, and Google is one of the few big ad companies that can make money from the ads.

The problem is that Google’s ads are pretty bad.

They’re designed to get you to click on a link or open a page that it wants you on.

And they don